The misunderstanding of the Church's motives has spewed such hatred, that some sane folks seem to have lost their powers of reasoning.
Servant of God, Bishop Fulton Sheen, once said, "There are not more than 100 people in the world who truly hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they perceive to be the Catholic Church." Sadly, Bishop Sheen's statement applies not only to those outside the Church, but to millions who are baptized Catholics. A case in point is the response to an initiative by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops calling for a "humane and comprehensive solution to the problems which beset our immigration system."
Go to any website and read the comments which follow postings of stories like the above. The misunderstanding of the Church's motives has spewed such hatred, that some sane folks seem to have lost their powers of reasoning. Consider this from fallen-away Catholic, Tom Tancredo: "I suspect the pope's immigration comments may have less to do with spreading the gospel than they do about recruiting new members of the church," Tancredo said. "This isn't preaching; it is faith-based marketing."
The notion that the only reason the Church is in favor of immigration reform is to enrich her own coffers would be laughable were it not so sad. If you are, as am I, a member of a parish where there are lots of poor immigrants, you know that it is the Church which aids them, and not the other way around. However, it matters not to faithful Catholics whether or not these folks can contribute financially; they know that the whole Body of Christ is enriched by their worship.
Those who are Catholics should remember the Lord's command to St. Peter to feed his sheep and tend his lambs. Do you really think the race or nationality of the sheep matters to the Church? If you do, then you'd better do some research into the millions of poor and sick around the world who are tended by her. Indeed, go to the Mother House of Blessed Teresa of Calcutta and you will everywhere see the words, "As you did it to one of the least of my brethren, you did it to me."
Is the Church's record in worldly affairs perfect? Hardly. Throughout her history, many representatives of the Church have erred gravely; a common saying purports that the road to Hell is paved with bishops' skulls. And although the Church's main concern is for the immigrants that are already here, they agree that it's a good idea to tighten laws which will prevent further illegal immigration and protect our sovereignty.
Yet it's also true that too many people merely look at this question in terms of legality and ignore the dictates of Christianity as it pertains to heavenly affairs. They cite our Savior's injunction to render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's. Yet many Christians agree that if a law or practice is immoral — such as forcing doctors to perform abortions — they will defy that law. But when it comes to immigration, this moral imperative doesn't seem to apply.
Consider that under the 2006 Republican bill which failed to pass, priests would have faced mandatory five-year prison sentences simply for giving aid and comfort to members of their flocks who were here illegally. If you can find a priest who would ask for a green card before giving food or shelter to someone in need, then he's in the wrong line of work. Again, at the basis of her desire for immigration reform, the Church seeks humane treatment for all peoples, regardless of their national origin. Don't forget that the parable of the Good Samaritan was given in answer to the question: who is my neighbor?
And make no mistake about it: a great many illegal immigrants are suffering exploitation by various groups, when their greatest sin is an overwhelming desire for a better way of life for themselves and their families. We should take care lest we, like the Pharisees, be lectured by our Savior for blindly following the letter of the law: If you only knew the meaning of the words; "I desire mercy and not sacrifice" you would not have condemned the innocent. (Matthew 12:7)
All of this is not to say that the USCCB or their stance on immigration is perfect. Sadly, some of the more liberal bishops have spent more time catering to the whims of this world than on the teaching of the Church's Magisterium. But if Catholics wish to vent their frustration at the Church in America, let them do so by praying that those bishops look into their hearts and return to more Christ-centered forms of worship in their dioceses, but let them also look into their own . . . for charity.
Lisa, the church position cost Catholic Charities my annual $10K donation. Frankly a clear reading of the church position is a clear reminder of why we should not have a national religion since keeping or adding to our illegal population will destroy the country and drop it to the level that the illegal aliens (they are not immigrants) fled from. Sorry don’t buy your logic but you can open your home to 20 or 30 of our visitors if you like but don’t try to open mine to satisfy your fantasy.
Lisa,
I am a ‘cradle’ Catholic and believe myself to be a devout, practicing catholic. I’m active in my parish, a member of the Knights of Columbus for over a decade. I also vehemently disagree with your entire posting. You are correct that Jesus encourages St. Peter to ‘feed his sheep and tend his lambs; and no, the nationality of the lambs does not matter. But Jesus did not say “Encourage your neighbor’s lambs to jump the fence in order to tend them.
I am slightly confused over your statement that; “Yet many Christians agree that if a law or practice is immoral — such as forcing doctors to perform abortions — they will defy that law. But when it comes to immigration, this moral imperative doesn’t seem to apply.” Do you contend that current immigration law is immoral and should therefore be ignored and/or actively disobeyed?
I fully comprehend that the overwhelming majority of illegal immigrants are just trying to find a better life for themselves and their offspring. However; I contend that if 100,000 of these people had marched on Mexico City demanding their rights as they did in California, they may have gotten some results. The ultimate answer to human advancement on this planet is not allowing all who desire to live as we do to come here on a whim, but rather to export the concepts of civil rights, property ownership, and rule-of-law to all other countries.
The USCCB according to the link you supplied supports the Comprehensive Immigration Reform for America’s Security and Prosperity Act of 2009. Let’s review just a few of the things authorized by this legislation;
• Protection is provided by prohibiting the separation of families with children and increasing protections for detained parents. Illegal immigrants with children born in this country are to be protected from deportation.
• Provides temporary visas and work authorizations to illegal immigrants in order that they may remain in the country in order to pursue labor claims against employers.
• Repeals the 287 (g) program and provides that only the federal government has the authority to enforce immigration law.
• Provides privacy protections, and prohibits the creation of a tamper proof National ID Card
• Includes anti-discrimination provisions and forbids employers from using verification systems to discriminate against applicants based on nationality and prohibits employers from terminating employees due to non-confirmation by the verification system.
• Provides for the legalization of illegal immigrants already within the US by granting a six year visa to anyone who:
a. Can establish they have been in the US illegally before December 15th 2009
b. Attest they have made some contribution to the US through employment, education, military service, or other community service.
c. Pay a $500 fine
d. Have no felony convictions
• Immigrants currently in removal proceedings can apply for legalization
All bars related to undocumented status – such as using false Social Security numbers – will be waived
So let’s review: If you are illegal and;
• Have an ‘anchor’ baby
• Have a labor disagreement with your employer at the time of your ‘discovery’
• Have been here illegally for at least 30 days
• Have proof that you’ve ‘contributed’ somehow
• Have the ability to pay or borrow $500
You’re golden. Sit on your ass and light up a camel; you’re in the ‘Promised Land’. The act also ‘forgives’ your use of forged documents, makes it an offense for an employer to refuse to employ you if, through no fault of your own, your forged documents cannot pass scrutiny, and finally prohibits local law enforcement from pursuing you, ever.
I could understand the USCCB being for ‘comprehensive’ immigration reform, but this is not it. This is playing Black Jack against the house equipped with a shoe containing nothing other than Jacks and Aces; A game not only almost impossible to lose, but also a game where the most often won bet is 3:2, loss for the house.
We went through Immigration reform in 1986 during Reagan. I believe we allowed 3 million illegal Mexican immigrants amnesty. Here we are now less than a quarter-century later and the number tossed about mostly is now 12 million; over four times as many. I suppose we may look forward to an essay in 2035 where we will beseech Catholics to get behind the current push to legalize 50 million more ‘undocumented’ workers?
I don’t’ believe I’m over-stating the obvious here when I say if you want to encourage certain behavior, just remove the restrictions, stigmas, and punishments associated with that behavior. I have no difficulty with being charitable toward illegal immigrants. Give them a meal, a bed, and in the morning, a bus ticket.
Bill, if it weren’t for the jus soli, the US would never be as great as it is. How could the jus sanguinis be applied to the US? Perhaps we should also have a king?
“Immigration reform” is simply left-speak for erasing the American identity through ethnic dilution, and no American conservative should defend it. The Roman Church is part of the Religous Left heresy, which cherry-picks the scriptures for justifications to advance socalism. In this instance they have shoved the part in Romans about objeying the civil authorities down the Memory Hole. The bishops should be preaching this to the illegals rather than encouraging them to break American laws intended to protect the American people, all the while taking full advantage of the laws that forbid patriotic Americans from, say, burning down Roman churches. This sort of moral cowardice is a staple of the Left. It should be needless to say that the concept of obeying American law is an alien concept to the bishops, since a fair number of them escaped prosecution for obstruction of justice in the pedophile priest scandals. True immigration reform would be to repulse this invasion as the Constitution obliges the federal government to do-and Article I, Section 9 does not, I repeat not, qualifty the word invasison with the adjective armed.
This is neither conservative nor intellectual, but rather an insult to our intelligence. There is no need for the Roman Church to bring the sheep and lambs to our country to tend to them, since the Roman Church is right there in their countries of origin. Indeed, they are coming here because they can’t make a decent living under the feudalistic economic paradigm of the societies where the Roman Church has held sway for centuries. As the author of “The Americas” feature of the Wall Street Journal editorial page wrote some time ago, Latin America is economically backward because it missed the Protestant Reformation and the Industrial Revolution, and you don’t need to be an intellectual to figure out what organization was resonsible for that.
Ms. Fabrizio is using the same kind of transparently flawed logic as the Left, so why are her writings being published on an allegedly conservative Web site? One suspects that Ms. Fabrizo has an Obama sticker on her car.
Willtell,
I don’t believe the debate is between ‘jus soli’ and ‘jus sanguinis’. Jus soli is (to continue your affinity for the latin) stare decisis.
The question is; should ‘jus soli’ apply in the case of an illegal alien; one who has already broken federal law prior to giving birth. My point is that mere physical location, in my opinion, should not automatically grant citizen’s or legal immigrant’s rights to an illegal.
Bill, I am for tough immigration laws, but I think that a baby is one individual who has his own rights independently from her parents. I must say that was jus solis that gave a nationality to immigrants belonging to religious minorities in their original countries (catholics from protestant countries, protestant from catholic countries, and jews from everywhere), that have shaped the US as the land of the free and the greatest country on earth.